Monday, December 24, 2007

THE RON PAUL ERROR

Ron Paul
Presidential candidate Ron Paul has finally spoken to the issue which I have been waiting to hear him speak. While I am in absolute awe of his strict constitutionalism, and wish him the best of luck in turning this country back to its original path, I realize geo-political concerns are vastly different in this global supersonic nuclear age, and America's future cannot be resolved without recognizing this more complicated set of affairs. This is not the steam engine era. But with Prof. Paul's recent comments about Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War, the slavery issue, and now the Islamic problem, I know I cannot wholeheartedly support this man's candidacy, despite the vapors of wishful thinking of which I may occasionally succumb in a fit of inconvenient nostalgia for the patriotism I was taught in my fifth grade civics class and confirmed in the Boy Scouts of America, Troop 219. The argument that had America stuck to the constitution in the first place, the world and the States would be a very different place, has no worthwhile rebuttal. However, that hallowed place is not where we find ourselves today.

Paul repeats several tired misconceptions about the nature of contemporary Islamic agitation and jihad, blaming the West again despite evidence that this aggression is being accelerated all over the globe and into areas which have nothing to do with American bases, forces, pop culture, morality, or lack of it. It has everything to do with the prime directive of Mohammed to go forth when possible and dominate the earth, giving it over to Allah worship. Muslim leadership sees this time of global crisis amid their own oil wealth as Allah's sign to them to push jihad into all lands of the kaffir. It's that simple, folks.

Another fissure in Paul's flimsy "occupied holy land" construct is that rapidly after 9/11, the US completed a withdrawal from Saudi Arabi, yet today we learn that this terror spewing nation remains one of the major exporters of murderous Jihadis.

Fact: The United States leaves the "holy" trash heap of Saudi Arabia, and the Jihad impulse remains intact and even amplified.

Fact: Leave Gaza, and the bombs and exterminationist rhetoric only elevates, as exemplified here.

Fact: Exterminate Israel, and the work of the pious Muslims is not yet complete.

We are left with the realization that if one comprehends the true nature of expansionist triumphalist fascist Islam, one would must also understand instantly that such Islamic victories would only whet Muslim lust for more booty, more murder, and more territory for the imperialist nightmare of Islam.

An argument can and should be made that today there are more Muslims than ever supporting UBL and al-Qaeda, or offshoots of al-Qaeda. Rather than blaming our actions and our policies, (or our inactions for that matter) for this reality, as many Westerners (and ALL Muslims) do, it's much simpler to explain it as something intrinsic within the infinite hideousness of Islam. Murderous, expansionist, terroristic Jihad is a creed deeply entrenched within Islam. Hatred of non-Muslims is intrinsic. Lust for booty and war too. These, and many other evil and vile strands are in the very weft of Islam, inseparable from it.

These evils are the monster which bin Laden brilliantly awoke and vexed back to full consciousness after centuries of relative dormancy. It is ALL Islam...

As the Irish poet William Butler Yeats wrote around the turn of the previous century:

And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?

Labels: , , , ,

2 Comments:

Blogger scott.mcdonnell said...

An intelligent rebuttal without the usual childish name-calling and smears. Thank you for writing this.

I completely disagree with you, of course, but your thoughts are pretty well laid out.

I only wish to take issue with THIS statement:
"It has everything to do with the prime directive of Mohammed to go forth when possible and dominate the earth, giving it over to Allah worship."

Many people believe this to be the case (including Ron Paul) but noone seems to be able to lay out a credible scenario by which several thousand morons in caves will accomplish this without detection.

9/11 happened because of incompetence. Ron Paul never said the jihadists are not a threat. He has repeatedly said that the threat is way overblown and I wholeheartedly agree with him. There is absolutely ZERO excuse for our intelligence failures leading up to 9/11. We address the incompetence and hold people accountable and the problem is solved. That is honestly all that is needed to solve this problem. Well that and guarding our borders and withholding immigration and visas from enemy states. How can one HONESTLY believe what we are doing know is keeping us safe? Because we haven't had another 9/11 in six years? How many 9/11s did we have in the six years BEFORE 9/11? It is evidence of nothing. If millions of illegal immigrants cross our borders every year, it is absolutely ridiculous to think the terrorist couldn't just slip right in.

It is THIS position that I find naive, not Ron Paul's. It is a terrible misconception that Ron Paul will simply ignore the Islamic extremist threat. In fact, I fully believe after meeting him in person that he is the ONLY one that will keep us safe.

I do hope it doesn't take another 9/11 regardless of all the liberties we have taken away, trillions of dollars borrowed and spent, and thousands of soldier's lives lost, for people to realize that our national security is NOT being taken seriously and is in fact being undermined by what we are doing.

Thanks again, for a reasoned post and Merry Christmas to you!

8:35 PM  
Blogger Gabriel Thy said...

Thanks Scott for your response. While I believe you believe we have disagreed on much, I am in complete agreement of what you wrote concerning border and immigration control.

Where we do diverge slightly is our level of confidence in keeping nuclear devices away from terrorists. And what of Europe? If Europe again falls to recognize and thwart the fascism in its midst as it did in the 1930s, are we to ignore our common bonds with them. My apprehensions about the foreign policy statements of Congressman Paul do not mean I agreed with the initial invasion, or our continued presence there in Iraq (or Afghanistan, for that matter) as a nation-building police force.

I would prefer we return our soldiers home to hunker down in fortifying our forces and security here at home. But I would desire a total mobilization of civilian and military assets.

By the way, although as a registered independent, I was not able to vote in my local primary, I did convince my wife to throw her vote to Ron Paul.

Unfortunately, his numbers never matched the enthusiasm of his supporters.

11:38 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home